OFN.
OFN.
oblantently funny news i know lawl
So what does this IPhone 4 offer over say my Nokia N96... Thats technically inferrior (aleggedly) to my old N95 from many years b4... Or my Sony W950I from even further ago, th 1 with video calling over 3g... Sry, Beer makes me ask too many questions but still... Hows freedom of formats to install?... Well u kno, Thats what smart phones are for...
3.5 inches 320x480 multitouch capacitive screen.
/post
If you want more...
iPhone 3G 16GB: was 579€
Nokia N96 16GB: was 719€
(and they say that the Apple one is overpriced...)
iOS > Symbian
Thousands of apps to a very small price.
A great navigator (TomTom) - it won't make you miss a real one.
Smart phones are phone that can do... smart things.
I can browse the web wherever I am, use the best e-mail program I've ever seen on a phone, have the best and most user-friendly OS interface, have all my music with me, play a game, read a proper-sized book... Isn't that smart?
This isn't a "technical" thing... it's like on Macs, they aren't "the fastest" computers on paper, but they can do great things. (Actually, I've got an AMD-based Windows PC, and it's fine. I tried my dad's MacBook Pro and I thought that it isn't even on the same planet).
Same with the iPhone. 2MP camera on the 2G/3G, (as I always say) like my old N70? Not a 5+MP camera with Carl Zeiss lenses?
Ok, if you have to print a photo, 3MPs more are better. But I assure you, I've seen a video recorded with (what a coincidence) an N96 -my cousin's ex-boyfriend's- and... oh dear. You could hear the case squeak, and it wasn't as fluent as a video with my 3Gs is, even if it has 2MP less.
What has an iPhone 4 more than an N96? Maybe nothing, hardware-wise (but I higly doubt that the Nokia has 512MB RAM and a 1GHz processor), but it does everything more easily (or, as I would say, better).
Sent by an iPhone
Have you been taking keynote language lessons from Steve Jobs?
Nope xD
Since when are smartphones for "installing freedom of formats"? Smartphones are phones that allow you to do more n
How many video calls have you made on you old phone? How man per day do you make? Effectively, nobody has done video calling yet, so Apple aren't that wrong to say they've pioneered it.
If you don't know why the iPhone is better than an N96 then you don't want or ned an iPhone. Simples.
I'll buy a Nokia or a Droid when I want something half as good, or when they actually make something I want. They all have their strong points, but for me, The iPhone has more.
1) the n96 isnt even nokias top of the line phone
2) the iphone 4 doesnt have a 1ghz processor
i know plenty of peopel who regularly do video calls via skype which is the world standard for video calling and also guess what the method most proper smartphones use for video calling thus allowing you to video call anybody with a webcam and a pc instead of the large number of maybe 2 people who have an iphone
On paper, the iPhone 4 isn't that impressive, or at least it's certainly not a revolution. But it'll be very slick to use and the UI (not the hardware, alas) will be very well designed.
The W950i was a dog of a phone to use (I should know, I had the w960i).
I hardly think putting a several year old bit of technology into a massmarket phone is called "pioneering", especially when it's been done oh so many times before.
<- Proud owner of an HTC Desire since friday
I had the same thoughts about Apple products as freddyalek90:
- Not the best specs, but ALWAYS high-end.
- Very well built
- Runs very smooth with minimal problems
But damn, my HTC is fking solid. I can not think of something the iPhone4 could do noticeably better (except video calling and the, imo useless, gyroscope thing)
Havent had a single problem yet, and trust me, ive explored every little bit
Browsing, scrolling, touchscreen etc. is 100% smooth all the time. Except some flash-infested sites tend to slow down the scrolling a bit
(oh right, Apple doesn't even support flash)
Android gives ALOT more customizability and freedom than iOs does,
is equally easy to use (imo) and is faster (when 2.2 is released).
True, Apple has a lot more apps. But instead of 100 apps for 1 purpose, u have 10, which is more than enough.
Dont get me wrong, i still think iPhones like most other Apple products are great devices, but they're just too expensive for what they really are.
Oh, my sister owns an around €300 Nokia smartphone (i'll look up the model later), and i think its a piece of crap compared to my €470 HTC.
I had the same thoughts about Apple products as freddyalek90:
- Not the best specs, but ALWAYS high-end.
- Very well built
- Runs very smooth with minimal problems
But damn, my HTC is fking solid. I can not think of something the iPhone4 could do noticeably better (except video calling and the, imo useless, gyroscope thing)
Havent had a single problem yet, and trust me, ive explored every little bit
Browsing, scrolling, touchscreen etc. is 100% smooth all the time. Except some flash-infested sites tend to slow down the scrolling a bit
(oh right, Apple doesn't even support flash)
Android gives ALOT more customizability and freedom than iOs does,
is equally easy to use (imo) and is faster (when 2.2 is released).
True, Apple has a lot more apps. But instead of 100 apps for 1 purpose, u have 10, which is more than enough.
Dont get me wrong, i still think iPhones like most other Apple products are great devices, but they're just too expensive for what they really are.
Oh, my sister owns an around €300 Nokia smartphone (i'll look up the model later), and i think its a piece of crap compared to my €470 HTC.
One more question, anyone from 3G switched to iOS4? Heard it slows it pretty much..
I have and I didn't experience any more slowdowns then before.
It freezes for a second while scrolling through Facebook and messages filled with MMS pictures.
Everything else, smooth experience so far.
Point is, iOS 4 isn't any faster or slower on 3G as far I can tell.
It freezes for a second while scrolling through Facebook and messages filled with MMS pictures.
Everything else, smooth experience so far.
Point is, iOS 4 isn't any faster or slower on 3G as far I can tell.
1)
Foilpact asked
so, top or not, I made that comparison.
2)
It does. It's the same chip that Apple puts in the iPad, the 1,0GHz Apple A4.
Every so often car is released that claims to be pioneering, yet does nothing differently to a car from the 1890s.
Since the last genuine pioneering move was either the discovery of fire or the invention of the wheel, then you can see that marketers get to play with words for the express purpose of selling their goods. You might see through their claims, but that's not to say it's wrong for them to claim them.
And I still doubt that the aerial design is the cause of the problem. Much more likely an assembly fault - if it was inherent in the design ALL iPhone 4s would be having the problem, but many aren't. Internet reports suggest 1 in 10 phones is problem free, which means (on the basis that only irate people write about their phone) that it's more likely 1 in 10 phones HAS the problem.
So many people just assume that new aerial design + reception issues on some (but not ALL) phones = aerial design was shit.
And then, despite the fact that Apple as a big company would be constantly hiring new staff, people jump on an advert for aerial designer positions....
It's certainly demonstrating how stupid both the pro-Apple and anti-Apple camps are. I'm venturing the "anti-" are the stupider bunch of people at the moment.
Well.. yes it is. They have "pioneered" nothing, they've just put in a feature a lot of phones have had before, added some hyperbole to the product launch and claim it's a revolution...
A phone that requires you to hold it in a certain way (despite it being a natural way to hold it and shown in Apple's promotional pictures!) is not good design.
No phone has pioneered anything since the very first one, many decades ago.
You will never work in sales or marketing then.
See, you've latched on to the whole "your holding it wrong thing" without applying any though. Not all phones are affected, thus it isn't a design issue. Chances are it's either a software fault or a manufacturing fault - e.g. lacquer being too thin on the antenna parts or the dielectric material not being to spec etc etc etc.
You will never work in sales or marketing then.
See, you've latched on to the whole "your holding it wrong thing" without applying any though. Not all phones are affected, thus it isn't a design issue. Chances are it's either a software fault or a manufacturing fault - e.g. lacquer being too thin on the antenna parts or the dielectric material not being to spec etc etc etc.
First phone to support SMS.
First phone to support MMS.
First phone to support video calls.
First phone to take pictures.
First phone to record video.
etc.
Technically, an SMS isn't very pioneering really - just a bit of data. Okay, so it might be the first use of text data in a phone shaped thing, but modems had been doing the same thing for years. Same with MMS.
Camcorders had been around for years before someone made it phone shaped. Is that really pioneering?
No, the iPhone 4 hasn't broken any new ground with video calling, especially as it is limited, currently, to Wifi calls between iP4s. But it's an awful lot more likely to be used than any pre-existing video phone before it, discounting the use of Skype (i.e. external software).
But that's marketing for you. You obviously think that SMS was a clever thing to do (even though it wasn't anything new at all), which means the marketing department for that phone did its job well.
Camcorders had been around for years before someone made it phone shaped. Is that really pioneering?
No, the iPhone 4 hasn't broken any new ground with video calling, especially as it is limited, currently, to Wifi calls between iP4s. But it's an awful lot more likely to be used than any pre-existing video phone before it, discounting the use of Skype (i.e. external software).
But that's marketing for you. You obviously think that SMS was a clever thing to do (even though it wasn't anything new at all), which means the marketing department for that phone did its job well.
So you think the definition of the term pioneering is for the very first time anything is done? Fitting a video camera into a phone isn't pioneering because the camcorder existed before it?
The reason why (sane) people are surprised at Apple's usage of the phrase "this changes everything" with relation to the iPhone is because there's nothing truly revolutionary or pioneering about it. The first mobile phone to incorporate SMS WAS pioneering, the first mobile phone that was able to take pictures WAS pioneering. Nothing the iPhone does is pioneering. It's just an amalgamation of previous ideas and lots of marketing. It's also funny to see an Apple buyer trying to poke fun at other people for falling for marketing
Isn't that exactly what SMS on a phone is, or pictures on a phone is, or videos on a phone is?
I've not used Facetime. I don't currently own an iPhone 4 as I'm waiting for T-Mobile to release it here, as they are the only provider with decent reception in the UK. But I can see that the iPhone 4 implementation of video calls is far better (wifi limitation notwithstanding) way of doing it than previous attempts. So in that respect it could 'change everything'. Will I use it, even when it's available on cellular data? No, probably not. I'm happy with voice calling to be honest, and I don't consider myself photogenic enough to harrow people with my image!!!!
I may well have fallen for the marketing of some aspects of the iPhone. But mainly I use one because it's better than anything else I've used. Friends and family have other phones - Nokias, 'Droids etc - and I play with them now and again. Most of them want an iPhone after using mine, and I never lust after theres. The iPhone is just so nice to use, from the better touch screen (not talking about resolution, but about response and that fact you rarely make a mistake, and it rarely misses a swipe...), to the nicer UI, to the App Store that makes getting new stuff painless........ This is based on using one for 19 months, not on marketing hype. And I bought one after playing with a friends for a day, not from seeing TV ads or Keynote speeches...
So in my opinion the iPhone 4 is the best phone for me. That will undoubtedly change at some point, but for now it hasn't. For me. My opinion.
Cannons were around for a long time before someone thought to put some on ships. Was the idea of putting them on ships and making them work properly pioneering? I think it was. Modems were around before mobile phones had SMS capability, but making the technology work in a different medium was pioneering. Using your 'logic' we could easily say "well, the elementary particles for everything in the universe have been around for billions of years, so nothing's pioneering". I have an older Android phone (HTC Magic) and I don't have problems with the UI failing to recognise gestures or make excessive mistakes when typing. I'm sure if I used an iPhone for an hour one day I'd probably think its usability was lower than the HTC's because I'm used to it. You're obviously entitled to your opinion about the iPhone, but when you try to argue facts rather than opinion it's different. You say, for example, that new cars that claim to be pioneering do "nothing differently" to a car from the 1890s. Well, that's clearly rubbish and we all know it (including, I hope, you). You could get a spot on Top Gear with logic like that though.
The automobile is one of the least improved things ever made by man since its inception. They are all pretty much the same as the original (well, maybe not the original, but certainly the same as most from the 1900s). You can pretend all you like that they've changed, but it's still a four wheeled machine, with sprung suspension, steering via a column, gears via a lever and brakes via friction material. Sure, the details have changed, and they're a lot more expensive to work on these days thanks to technology, and a lot less involving to drive (but also a lot easier to drive, which is why morons can manage it), but essentially they are the same.
Any mechanic from 2010 could understand how an 1890 car works. And any 1890s mechanic could understand how a 2010 car works (apart from the computing stuff, obviously).
Right, so we've agreed that the term pioneering depends on your point of view. We could talk about the initial particles of the universe, the first use in a given application, or maybe the first use that actually works on its own? Maybe the iPhone 4, being the first video calling that I can see anyone actually using without having to download Skype, is therefore actually a bit pioneering? Maybe it depends on your point of view. If your point of view is selling iPhones then maybe it's a legitimate use of the term pioneering?
And as I said, I'm not particularly impressed with video calling full stop. I don't use webcams. I have no desire to see the person I'm phoning. If I want to show a video of my child (one day in the future) to my parents then I'll video it and show them that (possibly via email, possibly via my own webspace, or possibly via Youtube).
Any mechanic from 2010 could understand how an 1890 car works. And any 1890s mechanic could understand how a 2010 car works (apart from the computing stuff, obviously).
Right, so we've agreed that the term pioneering depends on your point of view. We could talk about the initial particles of the universe, the first use in a given application, or maybe the first use that actually works on its own? Maybe the iPhone 4, being the first video calling that I can see anyone actually using without having to download Skype, is therefore actually a bit pioneering? Maybe it depends on your point of view. If your point of view is selling iPhones then maybe it's a legitimate use of the term pioneering?
And as I said, I'm not particularly impressed with video calling full stop. I don't use webcams. I have no desire to see the person I'm phoning. If I want to show a video of my child (one day in the future) to my parents then I'll video it and show them that (possibly via email, possibly via my own webspace, or possibly via Youtube).
Forgive the big text (I try not to use it), but it's quite an important detail. Yes, there are similarities between the first cars and modern cars, but the differences between them are vast. You can't just say "oh, and ignore all the things that totally invalidate my point".
"This changes everything" <--- that is the slogan. If the slogan was "This makes things a bit more accessible to you, and by the way we're just recycling what other people have already done" I would have no problems with it.
But in essence modern cars are massively similar. Just because modern ones use ECUs and have stuff to make stupid drivers less dangerous in them doesn't make them vastly different. A Veyron works on entirely the same principles as a Model T. If computers had been invented before cars, then the entire automotive progression from 1890 to 2010 would have occured in months not decades. Or at least could have.
It changes everything in terms of "phones having the ability to technically do video calling, but being so shite as to make it pointless" to "this could actually be used".
It's marketing still. Clever wording to make people want something. We're all fooled by it everyday, whether it be Apple stating that a decent implementation of video calling is better than anything done beforehand, or by Intel saying that new CPUs are better than old because they can fake multi-threading, or by Opel making you think the new model of Vectra is actually better than anything they've made before because its got a touchscreen radio...
Some things you fall for. Other things you see right through. Doesn't make one right and the other wrong. In fact, how do we know it won't "change everything"? In 10 years time we might look back and say "isn't video calling great. I remember when it was a shitty addon that didn't really work and that nobody bothered with, but when Apple released that iPhone 4 it really picked up. Thanks Apple". We don't know.
Note: I doubt that'll happen though! I can't imagine any normal scenario where a video call is better than a voice only call.
You'll never work in marketing either...
It changes everything in terms of "phones having the ability to technically do video calling, but being so shite as to make it pointless" to "this could actually be used".
It's marketing still. Clever wording to make people want something. We're all fooled by it everyday, whether it be Apple stating that a decent implementation of video calling is better than anything done beforehand, or by Intel saying that new CPUs are better than old because they can fake multi-threading, or by Opel making you think the new model of Vectra is actually better than anything they've made before because its got a touchscreen radio...
Some things you fall for. Other things you see right through. Doesn't make one right and the other wrong. In fact, how do we know it won't "change everything"? In 10 years time we might look back and say "isn't video calling great. I remember when it was a shitty addon that didn't really work and that nobody bothered with, but when Apple released that iPhone 4 it really picked up. Thanks Apple". We don't know.
Note: I doubt that'll happen though! I can't imagine any normal scenario where a video call is better than a voice only call.
You'll never work in marketing either...
iPhone 4
(480 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG